*Those considering applying to 16/132 (evidence synthesis full proposal) are requested to contact the PHR Programme to discuss their proposal in the first instance. Please contact us on info@phr.ac.uk or 023 8059 9697.

*Please note: This document is to be used as a guide and to assist with completion of the on-line application form only, for example to see how many characters are accepted in each section and how the printed complete form is laid out will look. Please do not try to use this as an application form, you must apply using the online form available through the links available when calls are open. You should also refer to the application form guidance notes which can be found next to the ‘Apply Now’ button.

All primary research projects are expected to establish a programme appointed Study/Trial Steering Committee and it is important that you read the TSC/SSC Guidance (pdf, 203.37 KB)before completing your application. Costs incurred by this committee should be included in the budget as appropriate.

Assessment dates

Proposals received by 1pm on the 4 April 2017, and deemed within remit, will be assessed for their importance to public health by the Programme Advisory Board (PAB) in May 2017.

Shortlisted outline proposals from this round will be considered by the Research Funding Board (RFB) in June 2017,and assessed for scientific quality, feasibility and value for money. Applicants will be informed of the RFB's decisions in July 2017, and successful outline proposal applicants will be invited to submit a full proposal. Applicants have eight weeks to complete and submit a full application for it to be considered at the October 2017 RFB.

Please note that if a very high response is received, some outline applications may not be taken forward for further assessment if they are deemed to be non-competitive and/or it may be necessary to defer some outline applications until a later date. 'Non-Competitive' means that a proposal is not of a sufficiently high standard to be taken forward for further assessment in comparison with other proposals received and funded by the PHR Programme because it has little or no realistic prospect of funding. This may be because of scientific quality, cost, scale/duration, or the makeup of the project team.

The NIHR uses cookies on the NIHR Evaluation, Trials and Studies website. Cookies improve how this website works and how it is used, and allow us to continue to make improvements.By using this website you are agreeing to our use of cookies.Read our cookie policy.